Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3171221.3171274acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageshriConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Do Children Perceive Whether a Robotic Peer is Learning or Not?

Published: 26 February 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Social robots are being used to create better educational scenarios, thereby fostering children»s learning. In the work presented here, we describe an autonomous social robot that was designed to enhance children»s handwriting skills. Exploiting the benefits of the learning-by-teaching method, the system provides a scenario in which a child acts as a teacher and corrects the handwriting difficulties of the robotic agent. To explore the children»s perception towards this social robot and the effect on their learning, we have conducted a multi-session study with children that compared two contrasting competencies in the robot: 'learning' vs 'non-learning' and presented as two conditions in the study. The results suggest that the children learned more in the learning condition compared with the non-learning condition and their learning gains seem to be affected by their perception of the robot. The results did not lead to any significant differences in the children»s perception of the robot in the first two weeks of interaction. However, by the end of the 4th week, the results changed. The children in the learning condition gave significantly higher writing ability and overall performance scores to the robot compared with the non-learning condition. In addition, the change in the robot»s learning capabilities did not show to affect their perceived intelligence, likability and friendliness towards it.

References

[1]
Vernon L Allen. 1976. Children as Teachers; Theory and Research on Tutoring. (1976).
[2]
Vernon L Allen and Robert S Feldman. 1974. Tutor attributions and attitude as a function of tutee performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 4, 4 (1974), 311--320.
[3]
Patrıcia Alves-Oliveira, Pedro Sequeira, and Ana Paiva. 2014. The Role that an Educational Robot Plays. Proceedings of Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (August 2014).
[4]
Albert Bandura. 1977. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review 84, 2 (1977), 191.
[5]
Albert Bandura. 1986. Social foundation of thought and action: A social-cognitive view. Englewood Cliffs (1986).
[6]
Christoph Bartneck, Elizabeth Croft, and Dana Kulic. 2009. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics 1, 1 (2009), 71--81.
[7]
Tanya N. Beran, Alejandro Ramirez-Serrano, Roman Kuzyk, Meghann Fior, and Sarah Nugent. 2011. Understanding How Children Understand Robots: Perceived Animism in Child-robot Interaction. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 69, 7--8 (July 2011), 539--550.
[8]
Karen L Bierman and Wyndol Furman. 1981. Effects of role and assignment rationale on attitudes formed during peer tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology 73, 1 (1981), 33.
[9]
Gautam Biswas, Krittaya Leelawong, Kadira Belynne, Karun Viswanath, Nancy Vye, Daniel Schwartz, and Joan Davis. 2004. Incorporating self regulated learning techniques into learning by teaching environments. In The 26th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. 120--125.
[10]
Gautam Biswas, Krittaya Leelawong, Daniel Schwartz, Nancy Vye, and The Teachable Agents Group at Vanderbilt. 2005. Learning by teaching: A new agent paradigm for educational software. Applied Artificial Intelligence 19, 3--4 (2005), 363--392.
[11]
John Bitchener. 2008. Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 17, 2 (2008), 102 -- 118.
[12]
David Boud, Ruth Cohen, and Jane Sampson. 2001. Peer learning and assessment. Peer Learning in Higher Education: Learning from&with Each Other (2001), 67.
[13]
Shruti Chandra, P. A.Oliveira, Séverin Lemaignan, Pedro Sequeira, Ana Paiva, and Pierre Dillenbourg. 2015. Can a child feel responsible for another in the presence of a robot in a collaborative learning activity?. In Robot and Human Interactive Comm.(RO-MAN), 2015 24th IEEE Int. Symposium on. IEEE, 167--172.
[14]
Shruti Chandra, P. A.Oliveira, Séverin Lemaignan, Pedro Sequeira, Ana Paiva, and Pierre Dillenbourg. 2016. Children's peer assessment and self-disclosure in the presence of an educational robot. In Robot and Human Interactive Comm.(ROMAN), 2016 25th IEEE Int. Symposium on. IEEE, 539--544.
[15]
Shruti Chandra, Pierre Dillenbourg, and Ana Paiva. 2017. Classification of Children's Handwriting Errors for the Design of an Educational Co-writer Robotic Peer. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children. ACM, 215--225.
[16]
A. Deshmukh, S. Janarthanam, H. Hastie, M. Y. Lim, R. Aylett, and G. Castellano. 2016. How expressiveness of a robotic tutor is perceived by children in a learning environment. In 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). 423--424.
[17]
Rachel Gockley, Allison Bruce, Jodi Forlizzi, Marek Michalowski, Anne Mundell, Stephanie Rosenthal, Brennan Sellner, Reid Simmons, Kevin Snipes, Alan C Schultz, et al. 2005. Designing robots for long-term social interaction. In Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2005.(IROS 2005). 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on. IEEE, 1338--1343.
[18]
Steve Graham, Karen R Harris, Linda Mason, Barbara Fink-Chorzempa, Susan Moran, and Bruce Saddler. 2008. How do primary grade teachers teach handwriting? A national survey. Reading and Writing 21, 1--2 (2008), 49--69.
[19]
Steve Graham, Naomi Weintraub, and Virginia Berninger. 2001. Which manuscript letters do primary grade children write legibly? Journal of Educational Psychology 93, 3 (2001), 488.
[20]
John Hattie and Helen Timperley. 2007. The power of feedback. Review of educational research 77, 1 (2007), 81--112.
[21]
Deanna Hood, Séverin Lemaignan, and Pierre Dillenbourg. 2015. When children teach a robot to write: An autonomous teachable humanoid which uses simulated handwriting. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. on HumanRobot Interaction. ACM, 83--90.
[22]
Monica MP Hoy, Mary Y Egan, and Katya P Feder. 2011. A systematic review of interventions to improve handwriting. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 78, 1 (2011), 13--25.
[23]
Peter H Kahn Jr, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, Nathan G Freier, Rachel L Severson, Brian T Gill, Jolina H Ruckert, and Solace Shen. 2012. 'Robovie, you'll have to go into the closet now': Children's social and moral relationships with a humanoid robot. Developmental psychology 48, 2 (2012), 303.
[24]
Takayuki Kanda, Takayuki Hirano, Daniel Eaton, and Hiroshi Ishiguro. 2004. Interactive Robots As Social Partners and Peer Tutors for Children: A Field Trial. Human-Computer Interaction 19, 1 (June 2004), 61--84.
[25]
James Kennedy, Paul Baxter, and Tony Belpaeme. 2015. The Robot Who Tried Too Hard: Social Behaviour of a Robot Tutor Can Negatively Affect Child Learning. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on HumanRobot Interaction (HRI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 67--74.
[26]
Iolanda Leite, Carlos Martinho, and Ana Paiva. 2013. Social robots for long-term interaction: a survey. International Journal of Social Robotics 5, 2 (2013), 291--308.
[27]
Shizuko Matsuzoe and Fumihide Tanaka. 2012. How smartly should robots behave?: Comparative investigation on the learning ability of a care-receiving robot. In 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. IEEE, 339--344.
[28]
Jane Medwell and David Wray. 2008. Handwriting forgotten language skill? Language and Education 22, 1 (2008), 34--47.
[29]
Sandra Y Okita, Daniel L Schwartz, Takanori Shibata, and Hideyuki Tokuda. 2005. Exploring young children's attributions through entertainment robots. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2005. ROMAN 2005. IEEE International Workshop on. IEEE, 390--395.
[30]
Christian O'Reilly and Réjean Plamondon. 2009. Development of a Sigma-- Lognormal representation for on-line signatures. Pattern Recognition 42, 12 (2009), 3324--3337.
[31]
Tiago Ribeiro, Eugenio Di Tullio, Lee J Corrigan, Aidan Jones, Fotios Papadopoulos, Ruth Aylett, Ginevra Castellano, and Ana Paiva. 2014. Developing interactive embodied characters using the thalamus framework: a collaborative approach. In Intelligent Virtual Agents. Springer, 364--373.
[32]
Tiago Ribeiro, André Pereira, Eugenio Di Tullio, Patrıcia Alves-Oliveira, and Ana Paiva. 2014. From Thalamus to Skene: High-level behaviour planning and managing for mixed-reality characters. In Proceedings of the IVA 2014 Workshop on Architectures and Standards for IVAs.
[33]
Cynthia A Rohrbeck, Marika D Ginsburg-Block, John W Fantuzzo, and Traci R Miller. 2003. Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Psychology 95, 2 (2003), 240.
[34]
Tamie Salter, Kerstin Dautenhahn, and R Bockhorst. 2004. Robots moving out of the laboratory-detecting interaction levels and human contact in noisy school environments. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2004. ROMAN 2004. 13th IEEE International Workshop on. IEEE, 563--568.
[35]
Theodore R Sarbin. 1966. Role Theory: Concepts and Research. John Wiley&Sons, Inc. 1966.
[36]
Rosemary Sassoon, Ian Nimmo-Smith, and Alan M. Wing. 1986. An analysis of children's penholds. Advances in Psychology 37 (1986), 93--106.
[37]
Fumihide Tanaka and Shizuko Matsuzoe. 2012. Children teach a care-receiving robot to promote their learning: Field experiments in a classroom for vocabulary learning. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction 1, 1 (2012).
[38]
Keith J Topping. 1996. The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: A typology and review of the literature. Higher education 32, 3 (1996), 321--345.
[39]
H. Yin, P. Alves-Olivera, F. S. Melo, A. Billard, and A. Paiva. 2016. Synthesizing Robotic Handwriting Motion by Learning from Human Demonstrations. In Proceedings of International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI). (2016).
[40]
Barry J Zimmerman. 2000. Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary educational psychology 25, 1 (2000), 82--91.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Power in Human-Robot InteractionProceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610977.3634949(269-282)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
  • (2023)Lessons Learned from in the Wild Child-Robot Interaction in Multiple Ecosystems of Care and EducationProceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction10.1145/3623809.3623855(142-151)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2023
  • (2022)"We Make a Great Team!": Adults with Low Prior Domain Knowledge Learn more from a Peer Robot than a Tutor RobotProceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.5555/3523760.3523787(176-184)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2022
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
HRI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
February 2018
468 pages
ISBN:9781450349536
DOI:10.1145/3171221
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 26 February 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. children
  2. educational robotics
  3. learning-by-teaching
  4. multi-session studies
  5. social robotics

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT)

Conference

HRI '18
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

HRI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 49 of 206 submissions, 24%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 268 of 1,124 submissions, 24%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)35
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 20 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Power in Human-Robot InteractionProceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610977.3634949(269-282)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
  • (2023)Lessons Learned from in the Wild Child-Robot Interaction in Multiple Ecosystems of Care and EducationProceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction10.1145/3623809.3623855(142-151)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2023
  • (2022)"We Make a Great Team!": Adults with Low Prior Domain Knowledge Learn more from a Peer Robot than a Tutor RobotProceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.5555/3523760.3523787(176-184)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2022
  • (2022)Informing Age-Appropriate AI: Examining Principles and Practices of AI for ChildrenProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3502057(1-29)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
  • (2022)Non-Dyadic Interaction: A Literature Review of 15 Years of Human-Robot Interaction Conference PublicationsACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/348824211:2(1-32)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2022
  • (2022)“We Make a Great Team!”: Adults with Low Prior Domain Knowledge Learn more from a Peer Robot than a Tutor Robot2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)10.1109/HRI53351.2022.9889441(176-184)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2022
  • (2021)Using social robots to create inclusive classroom experiences for children with mixed visual abilitiesACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing10.1145/3458055.3458056(1-6)Online publication date: 21-Mar-2021
  • (2021)Domestic Robots and the Dream of Automation: Understanding Human Interaction and InterventionProceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3411764.3445629(1-13)Online publication date: 6-May-2021
  • (2021)Cheerful Encouragement or Careful Listening: The Dynamics of Robot Etiquette at Children’s Different Developmental StagesComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2021.106697(106697)Online publication date: Jan-2021
  • (2020)Better togetherProceedings of the 2020 ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference: Extended Abstracts10.1145/3397617.3398029(5-8)Online publication date: 21-Jun-2020
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media